Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Sun, 7 Mar 2021 18:04:50 +0100
From:   Ansuel Smith <ansuelsmth@gmail.com>
To:     =?utf-8?B?UmFmYcWCIE1pxYJlY2tp?= <zajec5@gmail.com>
Cc:     Richard Weinberger <richard@nod.at>, devicetree@vger.kernel.org,
        Vignesh Raghavendra <vigneshr@ti.com>,
        Boris Brezillon <bbrezillon@kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Rob Herring <robh+dt@kernel.org>,
        linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org,
        Miquel Raynal <miquel.raynal@bootlin.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/3] dt-bindings: mtd: Document use of
 nvmem-partitions compatible
Message-ID: <YEUHsoC4V+H6PCHL@Ansuel-xps.localdomain>
References: <20210216212638.28382-1-ansuelsmth@gmail.com>
 <20210216212638.28382-4-ansuelsmth@gmail.com>
 <ee596471-db9b-43e4-c085-9bd938101587@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <ee596471-db9b-43e4-c085-9bd938101587@gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Mar 08, 2021 at 10:48:32AM +0100, Rafał Miłecki wrote:
> On 16.02.2021 22:26, Ansuel Smith wrote:
> > Document nvmem-partitions compatible used to treat mtd partitions as a
> > nvmem provider.
> 
> I'm just wondering if "nvmem-partitions" is accurate enough. Partitions
> bit sounds a bit ambiguous in the mtd context.
> 
> What do you think about "mtd-nvmem-cells" or just "nvmem-cells"?

I read somewhere that mtd is not so standard so "nvmem-cells" should be the
right compatible.
To sum up, with v2 I should change the compatible name and just push the
2 and 3 patch. (waiting your fix to be accepted) Correct?